There’s a difference between charity and forced giving

To the editor:

Regarding John Esperian's attempted biblical lesson whereby he suggests that, "Jesus might possibly have thought along the lines of a liberal Democrat":

Mr. Esperian, like many others, misses the point. The Bible passages that he's contorting himself to lean upon are espousing the appropriateness and grace of "charity." He can rifle through the Bible as much as he wants to continue his efforts to promote legislative theft, and he still will not find any passages penned by Paul or Luke saying anything close to: "Submit to me, ye who worketh mightily to favor and benefit thine clan ... as ye must forketh over majorities of ye yield to be doled as I see fit! Heed not, and gain risk of having ye's unrighteous butt thrown into the slammereth."

All acts of charity come from the heart. It appears that Mr. Esperian may have outsourced his to the government.

I'm gonna do what I can to hang onto mine.

Paul Parrish

Henderson

Forced giving

To the editor:

In response to John Esperian's letter regarding the political leanings of Jesus, and his criticism of Bob Gore's opinion about the morality of taking from one person to give to another, it is clear that Mr. Esperian doesn't understand the difference between giving freely and forced "giving." In the Bible verses he quotes, he needs to note the word "should" is used, not "must," in teaching about charity.

We are given free will to choose our course and values in life, and government-mandated charity is not charity. Anyone who thinks he will go to heaven because he let the government take from him and give to another is probably mistaken. I choose to give to causes I believe to be deserving. For the government, or anybody else, to take from me and give to another based on the decision of some agency's bureaucrats is oppressive.

While the Catholic Church has taught the concept of social justice for decades, it is taught as the voluntary ideal, the way people should choose to live and give. Government mandated social justice is adverse to freedom.

Those who receive from the government can become dependent (the opposite of independent), while those who have their property taken no longer have the freedom to keep what they have worked for. It is a simple concept. Neither are truly free. Forcing your idea of charity on others is not very charitable. The real question is, should the government be involved in our lives to such a high degree?

Blane Bujalski

Henderson

Full employment

To the editor:

In response to Sunday's story, "Justices order resentencing in 1982 murder":

This story revealed just how absurdly the wheels of justice grind. David Winfield Mitchell was convicted of the 1982 murder of a Carson City teenager. He was initially sentenced to life without parole plus 20 years. Some lawyer, on the pretense of representing his client, appealed the sentencing process and was able to convince a three-judge panel of the Nevada Supreme Court to change it to two life sentences to be served consecutively.

The defendant is now 65 years old. Mitchell's lawyer was not identified in the article, but no doubt his services were paid by the taxpayers of Nevada.

This entire process does nothing more than provide jobs for attorneys and perpetuate the inefficiency of government. The backlog of cases awaiting jurisprudence could be dramatically eased if appeals such are these were prohibited.

This practice is little more than ambulance chasing. The case has little to do with the pursuit of justice and everything to do with palm greasing among the members of the bar.

William C. Dwyer

Las Vegas

Pay up and shut up

To the editor:

In response to Mike Garrison's Saturday letter complaining about his property taxes not reflecting the actual value of his home:

Property taxes are far from accurate, but I wonder if Mr. Garrison informed the assessor's office while his home value was skyrocketing and offered to pay the proper amount of taxes to reflect his wonderful (at the time) investment. My guess is no.

And the reason our education system is so bad is people like Mr. Garrison not wanting to pay their fair share of taxes. Check the facts, Mr. Garrison: We pay one of the lowest rates in the country.

Desmond Lloyd

Henderson

Want to work

To the editor:

In response to Bob Dubin's Monday letter ("Employers 0, employees just getting welfare," I'd like to add some observations and real statistics.

Using the Sunday "Jobs" section of the Review-Journal as a reference, I found approximately 200 jobs listed. The vast majority required prior experience in technical or professional fields (engineers, nursing, etc.). Many more were in the sales field, most paying on a commission basis. Fewer than 50 job listings were generic enough for someone with little or no experience in a particular field to be considered for employment.

Currently, there are more than 70,000 unemployed people in Clark County. Given 200 jobs listed, that equates to about 350 potential applicants for each job. That assumes that they're all qualified for every position.

I have heard many people say that unemployed people would prefer to receive their "welfare" check than to work. Given the aforementioned statistics, I would suggest that is simply not the case.

Joel Rector

North Las Vegas